User talk:Captainmike
<< User talk:Captainmike/archive ---- Valora Thanks for paying attention - I saw the user but just didn't put two and two together :( — Morder (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC) :No problem -- figured putting the welcome in both places would achieve a better result... :) I'll leave it to the more experienced guys to continue the process.. -- Captain MKB 02:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC) Your Site http://www.captainmike.org/photos.html seems to be broken - all the images are 404'd :) But when you click on them they're there...just letting you know... — Morder (talk) 22:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC) :MEh .. old party photos needed to get moved. forget where i put them, but theyre going away. -- Captain MKB 00:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC) ::Now they seem to be all gone, thumbnails and pics. Which is too bad, because Andrew told me to go to your site to see some picture, but I don't remember what he was talking about. But now I can't even browse them. Wah. Jbshryne 21:43, January 19, 2010 (UTC) :::I think there were some notable light saber fight shots. I could probably dig them up but i know the people in them hate when i drag out decade old pictures of them. -- Captain MKB 01:31, January 20, 2010 (UTC) STEU I left a message on your talk page over there. If you could check it out, I'd appreciate it. --Kevin W.•Talk to me 07:49, January 5, 2010 (UTC) 75.32.147.197 Just noticed you rebanned 75.32.147.197. While a new comment was added to "vandalism in progress," there doesn't seem to be any vandalism in progress. The last act was almost a month ago, and since the last block was lifted, there has been no vandalism. How is the new extended block warranted? --OuroborosCobra talk 01:09, January 31, 2010 (UTC) :See my comment on Vandalism in Progress -- since no one ever cleaned up that page, whoever reformatted that page just now made me think the vandalism was still in progress, my mistake. However, this IP is a three-time loser, another few weeks without him isn't the end of the world. Fix it if you feel that is needed. -- Captain MKB 01:18, January 31, 2010 (UTC) I'm not an administrator, I can't fix it, but don't you think you should? Don't you think it is bad form for administrators to hand out blocks when they aren't earned, then just leaving them because they are too lazy to fix it when they realize that no vandalism has actually been committed? --OuroborosCobra talk 01:25, January 31, 2010 (UTC) :Actually, as an administrator, I've reviewed the previous three blocks and have decided that the lengthened block should be continued because of the repeated bad behavior of this IP. :Furthermore, I'm shocked and insulted you'd attribute this to laziness on my part. Thanks for your interest in the security of the site and the application of our policies. Now that this situation is resolved, you are free to continue editing pages here on Memory Alpha. I'm glad I could be of help addressing your concerns about this situation. You're welcome. :) -- Captain MKB 01:31, January 31, 2010 (UTC) You've done no such thing. You've reinstituted a block on an IP address, which can effect more than one user do to ISP recycling of IP addresses, against someone who has not shown a repeat of poor behavior after a week of their previous block being lifted. Blocks aren't simply "punishments," they are something that is used to protect the site from vandalism, and in this case the vandalism was long over, meaning there was no need for a block. While I was careful not to use personal language in my previous post, but to speak of general administrator behavior, I will use specific language now. You have lied. You have claimed now that you instituted this new block because you felt the old one wasn't long enough, when you previously claimed that you instituted the new block because you accidentally were given the impression of continued vandalism in progress. When presented with the fact that it wasn't continuing, you basically just shrugged and said "you deal with it if you want to." I am in no way comforted by this situation, I am not welcome, my concerns have not been addressed, and you have behaved very poorly simply for the reason of not wanting to look like you made a mistake. Deal with the fact that this IP address, which may not even be assigned to the same user now, has been blocked for no further vandalism a week after their last block was lifted. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:41, January 31, 2010 (UTC) :I must be lazy. -- Captain MKB 01:45, January 31, 2010 (UTC) ::By the way, OC, please reread my above comment with a much greater emphasis on the ":)" smiley face -- there's this whimsical quality to the comment, like, maybe, I'm not reacting hurriedly to your outraged rhetoric and insults, but still was speaking facetiously and was intending to deal with the situation. And I do apologize, for some reason I thought you were an admin and could help me out with this. With my laziness. And my lies. -- Captain MKB 01:59, January 31, 2010 (UTC) How exactly is a smiley face supposed to make me think "as an administrator, I've reviewed the previous three blocks and have decided that the lengthened block should be continued because of the repeated bad behavior of this IP" actually means "oops, I'll go fix this thing," because I'm not seeing how, --OuroborosCobra talk 02:03, January 31, 2010 (UTC)